Council response underscores urgency of staffing and vulnerable student crises as justification for legislative intervention

NEW YORK – Today, the New York City Council submitted a legal reply in the lawsuit filed by the administration of Mayor Mamdani against Local Law 129 of 2026, which would provide a one-time workforce stabilization payment of as much as $10,000 to paraprofessionals working in our City’s public schools. The legislation was passed by the Council on July 16 and returned unsigned by the mayor on August 18, when it became law.

In the filing, the Council reiterated its calls for the court to dismiss the administration’s lawsuit, citing several key arguments:

  • The Administration has the power to address the staffing crisis and end the dispute unilaterally, through collective bargaining, without court intervention.
  • State Taylor Law does not preclude additional avenues for worker benefits, and therefore does not block the Council from passing laws that improve the pay or conditions of public employees.
  • The one-time payment is an emergency stop-gap response to an urgent crisis within New York City schools and, for that reason, it does not set the “terms and conditions of employment” and is consistent with the Taylor Law.

Following the enactment of Local Law 129, the Mamdani Administration filed a lawsuit to block the payment from going into effect after opting neither to veto the bill nor sign it into law. The Council immediately responded with a Motion to Dismiss the Mayor’s lawsuit.

Local Law 129, also known as the RESPECT Check Act, passed unanimously earlier this year as an emergency response to the paraprofessional staffing crisis within New York City’s public schools. The City of New York employs more than 25,000 paraprofessional educators. As of March 2026, there were over 1,000 paraprofessional vacancies. This crisis has led to students with disabilities not receiving their legally mandated services, contributing to the $1.5 billion the City most recently allocated towards due process cases.

“The collective bargaining process was designed to give public employees a seat at the table to negotiate fairer pay and working conditions. But when that process breaks down, the Council has a responsibility to step in and take decisive legislative action to protect both our city’s workers and our most vulnerable students,” said Speaker Julie Menin. “Paraprofessionals are essential city workers, who day after day dedicate their time, energy, and care to serving some of our city’s highest need students. The work that they do cannot just be celebrated with words and affirmations; it must be backed with real tangible action to address what cannot be described as anything other than a crisis within our public education system. We remain confident in the Council’s authority to enact this law and will continue to vigorously defend it in court.”

On Tuesday, the United Federation of Teachers, the union that is a co-defendant in the lawsuit, separately filed its own response papers seeking dismissal of the lawsuit with prejudice.

“New York City is unable to hire and retain the number of paraprofessionals needed to safeguard the city’s most vulnerable children,” said Michael Mulgrew, President of the United Federation of Teachers. “The system is clearly broken. The City Council documented this emergency, saw it was not being addressed, and stepped in. That is their job. The law is necessary, carefully crafted, and legal. The court should dismiss the city’s objection to this law.”

Sponsored by Council Member Carmen De La Rosa, Local Law 129 was meant to serve as a temporary measure, with the goal of addressing the staffing crisis and staunching attrition while paraprofessionals pursue a longer-term solution through collective bargaining.

“The City Council passed Local Law 129 unanimously to address our paraprofessional retention and services mandate crisis with a one-time stabilization bonus while the bargaining process runs its course,” said Council Member Carmen De La Rosa. “This local law does not bar the administration from negotiating, but responds to an urgent gap in the meantime. While this lawsuit continues, 25,000 public employees contemplate leaving a job they love serving our most vulnerable students to make ends meet. This administration’s focus is affordability, as is the Council’s, and we cannot continue to limit options for solutions for these workers in crisis.”

The Council’s full legal filling can be found here.

In the legal response, the Council wrote that, “Although it is rare for the collective bargaining process to fail public workers so egregiously that local legislation is necessary to address the crisis, the Taylor Law does not preempt that outcome.” The filing continued by noting that “Plaintiffs’ anti-worker, anti-democratic misinterpretation of the Taylor Law flies in the face of the law’s text and that history.”

###